The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Realism in video games is becoming more prominent. It's giving us a wider variety of games to choose from. In the old days of gaming, nothing was very realistic; the emphasis was more on pure fun, rather than realism. But now with graphical capabilities enhanced, we now have games with more realistic characters and plots on all 3 systems. So now that you've had a taste of both which type of game do you prefer? Do you like the more realism based games, or do you prefer the more far fetched games?
In my view, I like far fetched games more. I just think there is a distinct lack of creativity in games orientated on realism. Far fetched games require more imaginative ideas and a large chunk of thought. The main argument for liking far fetched games is this: Think of it this way. Imagine a realistic Mario game. He’d actually look proportional and even like a normal person, and instead of having the ability of jumping an incredible height he’d only be able to manage about 2 feet. What good is a platform game if you can barely jump? And to top it all off you’d have to get rid of all the other unusual characters like Yoshi and Bowser because they hardly look realistic do they? And in my view these characters make up a large portion of the Mario success story. So therefore this simply wouldn’t suit the game.
Another fitting example of the concept of realism ruining a game would be Crazy Taxi. The wacky physics enable you to bulldoze your way through heavy amounts of traffic. You can even accomplish knocking down a bus, 10 times heavier than your car with no effort. You may think of this as stupidly unreal and may even put you off the game as a whole. But can you really imagine it trying to be more realistic? You’d sit in traffic jams all day, and as soon as you receive a slight dent on your car that would be that for your days work. And then you would have to drive within the speed limits, carefully drive alongside your subdued customers and moan like a grumpy git about your work hours. Sounds boring don’t it?
I’ve heard some gamers pronounce there dislike for war games because they are not true to what it would have been like in a real war. But can you imagine Moh:Frontline having a one hit kill policy? Now wouldn’t that be fun, the game would last an enormous 1 minute maximum.
The one game I think falls into that syndrome of trying to be TOO realistic is the Shenmue series. Okay they are good games, but could have been a lot better but ended up being a little boring after a while. It had a lot of potential but it being too realistic took things too far and ultimately led to a poorer game than it should have been.
All that said there are a number of games which are very much suited to being classified as realistic. Football is a classic example. Okay so you’re playing another dull instalment of the FIFA series. Now where would be the skill in winning if you could turn invisible or kill the centre half and throw the goalkeeper out of the ground? Yeah it may be a tad funny for a while, but it’s just not football, and therefore which is what you have brought the game for and what the developers have been trying to portray. The same rule applies with virtually every sport games. If they’re far fetched they won’t be enjoyable.
So with the arguments for both cases ironed out how about a game which blends the two together? Take GTA3 for example. In one aspect it concentrates on realism and in another it takes the game to an unrealistic extreme. For example, the timing scale feature makes the game feel all the more real, and is one of the better aspects of the game. But in contrast, in real life can we really run over old grannies and survive crashing into a building in a dodo plane? I think not. But this is what has made the game the success that it is, and maybe more games should follow suit in mixing realism and unrealistic parts together.
I think that the main point is, is that some genre’s are suited to trying to be realistic and some just simply aren’t. But what do *you* think. Do you go for the games which attempt to be realistic? Or opt for the more far fetched games?
Cheers,
Quinty
In my view, I like far fetched games more. I just think there is a distinct lack of creativity in games orientated on realism. Far fetched games require more imaginative ideas and a large chunk of thought. The main argument for liking far fetched games is this: Think of it this way. Imagine a realistic Mario game. He’d actually look proportional and even like a normal person, and instead of having the ability of jumping an incredible height he’d only be able to manage about 2 feet. What good is a platform game if you can barely jump? And to top it all off you’d have to get rid of all the other unusual characters like Yoshi and Bowser because they hardly look realistic do they? And in my view these characters make up a large portion of the Mario success story. So therefore this simply wouldn’t suit the game.
Another fitting example of the concept of realism ruining a game would be Crazy Taxi. The wacky physics enable you to bulldoze your way through heavy amounts of traffic. You can even accomplish knocking down a bus, 10 times heavier than your car with no effort. You may think of this as stupidly unreal and may even put you off the game as a whole. But can you really imagine it trying to be more realistic? You’d sit in traffic jams all day, and as soon as you receive a slight dent on your car that would be that for your days work. And then you would have to drive within the speed limits, carefully drive alongside your subdued customers and moan like a grumpy git about your work hours. Sounds boring don’t it?
I’ve heard some gamers pronounce there dislike for war games because they are not true to what it would have been like in a real war. But can you imagine Moh:Frontline having a one hit kill policy? Now wouldn’t that be fun, the game would last an enormous 1 minute maximum.
The one game I think falls into that syndrome of trying to be TOO realistic is the Shenmue series. Okay they are good games, but could have been a lot better but ended up being a little boring after a while. It had a lot of potential but it being too realistic took things too far and ultimately led to a poorer game than it should have been.
All that said there are a number of games which are very much suited to being classified as realistic. Football is a classic example. Okay so you’re playing another dull instalment of the FIFA series. Now where would be the skill in winning if you could turn invisible or kill the centre half and throw the goalkeeper out of the ground? Yeah it may be a tad funny for a while, but it’s just not football, and therefore which is what you have brought the game for and what the developers have been trying to portray. The same rule applies with virtually every sport games. If they’re far fetched they won’t be enjoyable.
So with the arguments for both cases ironed out how about a game which blends the two together? Take GTA3 for example. In one aspect it concentrates on realism and in another it takes the game to an unrealistic extreme. For example, the timing scale feature makes the game feel all the more real, and is one of the better aspects of the game. But in contrast, in real life can we really run over old grannies and survive crashing into a building in a dodo plane? I think not. But this is what has made the game the success that it is, and maybe more games should follow suit in mixing realism and unrealistic parts together.
I think that the main point is, is that some genre’s are suited to trying to be realistic and some just simply aren’t. But what do *you* think. Do you go for the games which attempt to be realistic? Or opt for the more far fetched games?
Cheers,
Quinty
Realism in video games is becoming more prominent. It's giving us a wider variety of games to choose from. In the old days of gaming, nothing was very realistic; the emphasis was more on pure fun, rather than realism. But now with graphical capabilities enhanced, we now have games with more realistic characters and plots on all 3 systems. So now that you've had a taste of both which type of game do you prefer? Do you like the more realism based games, or do you prefer the more far fetched games?
In my view, I like far fetched games more. I just think there is a distinct lack of creativity in games orientated on realism. Far fetched games require more imaginative ideas and a large chunk of thought. The main argument for liking far fetched games is this: Think of it this way. Imagine a realistic Mario game. He’d actually look proportional and even like a normal person, and instead of having the ability of jumping an incredible height he’d only be able to manage about 2 feet. What good is a platform game if you can barely jump? And to top it all off you’d have to get rid of all the other unusual characters like Yoshi and Bowser because they hardly look realistic do they? And in my view these characters make up a large portion of the Mario success story. So therefore this simply wouldn’t suit the game.
Another fitting example of the concept of realism ruining a game would be Crazy Taxi. The wacky physics enable you to bulldoze your way through heavy amounts of traffic. You can even accomplish knocking down a bus, 10 times heavier than your car with no effort. You may think of this as stupidly unreal and may even put you off the game as a whole. But can you really imagine it trying to be more realistic? You’d sit in traffic jams all day, and as soon as you receive a slight dent on your car that would be that for your days work. And then you would have to drive within the speed limits, carefully drive alongside your subdued customers and moan like a grumpy git about your work hours. Sounds boring don’t it?
I’ve heard some gamers pronounce there dislike for war games because they are not true to what it would have been like in a real war. But can you imagine Moh:Frontline having a one hit kill policy? Now wouldn’t that be fun, the game would last an enormous 1 minute maximum.
The one game I think falls into that syndrome of trying to be TOO realistic is the Shenmue series. Okay they are good games, but could have been a lot better but ended up being a little boring after a while. It had a lot of potential but it being too realistic took things too far and ultimately led to a poorer game than it should have been.
All that said there are a number of games which are very much suited to being classified as realistic. Football is a classic example. Okay so you’re playing another dull instalment of the FIFA series. Now where would be the skill in winning if you could turn invisible or kill the centre half and throw the goalkeeper out of the ground? Yeah it may be a tad funny for a while, but it’s just not football, and therefore which is what you have brought the game for and what the developers have been trying to portray. The same rule applies with virtually every sport games. If they’re far fetched they won’t be enjoyable.
So with the arguments for both cases ironed out how about a game which blends the two together? Take GTA3 for example. In one aspect it concentrates on realism and in another it takes the game to an unrealistic extreme. For example, the timing scale feature makes the game feel all the more real, and is one of the better aspects of the game. But in contrast, in real life can we really run over old grannies and survive crashing into a building in a dodo plane? I think not. But this is what has made the game the success that it is, and maybe more games should follow suit in mixing realism and unrealistic parts together.
I think that the main point is, is that some genre’s are suited to trying to be realistic and some just simply aren’t. But what do *you* think. Do you go for the games which attempt to be realistic? Or opt for the more far fetched games?
Cheers,
Quinty
In my view, I like far fetched games more. I just think there is a distinct lack of creativity in games orientated on realism. Far fetched games require more imaginative ideas and a large chunk of thought. The main argument for liking far fetched games is this: Think of it this way. Imagine a realistic Mario game. He’d actually look proportional and even like a normal person, and instead of having the ability of jumping an incredible height he’d only be able to manage about 2 feet. What good is a platform game if you can barely jump? And to top it all off you’d have to get rid of all the other unusual characters like Yoshi and Bowser because they hardly look realistic do they? And in my view these characters make up a large portion of the Mario success story. So therefore this simply wouldn’t suit the game.
Another fitting example of the concept of realism ruining a game would be Crazy Taxi. The wacky physics enable you to bulldoze your way through heavy amounts of traffic. You can even accomplish knocking down a bus, 10 times heavier than your car with no effort. You may think of this as stupidly unreal and may even put you off the game as a whole. But can you really imagine it trying to be more realistic? You’d sit in traffic jams all day, and as soon as you receive a slight dent on your car that would be that for your days work. And then you would have to drive within the speed limits, carefully drive alongside your subdued customers and moan like a grumpy git about your work hours. Sounds boring don’t it?
I’ve heard some gamers pronounce there dislike for war games because they are not true to what it would have been like in a real war. But can you imagine Moh:Frontline having a one hit kill policy? Now wouldn’t that be fun, the game would last an enormous 1 minute maximum.
The one game I think falls into that syndrome of trying to be TOO realistic is the Shenmue series. Okay they are good games, but could have been a lot better but ended up being a little boring after a while. It had a lot of potential but it being too realistic took things too far and ultimately led to a poorer game than it should have been.
All that said there are a number of games which are very much suited to being classified as realistic. Football is a classic example. Okay so you’re playing another dull instalment of the FIFA series. Now where would be the skill in winning if you could turn invisible or kill the centre half and throw the goalkeeper out of the ground? Yeah it may be a tad funny for a while, but it’s just not football, and therefore which is what you have brought the game for and what the developers have been trying to portray. The same rule applies with virtually every sport games. If they’re far fetched they won’t be enjoyable.
So with the arguments for both cases ironed out how about a game which blends the two together? Take GTA3 for example. In one aspect it concentrates on realism and in another it takes the game to an unrealistic extreme. For example, the timing scale feature makes the game feel all the more real, and is one of the better aspects of the game. But in contrast, in real life can we really run over old grannies and survive crashing into a building in a dodo plane? I think not. But this is what has made the game the success that it is, and maybe more games should follow suit in mixing realism and unrealistic parts together.
I think that the main point is, is that some genre’s are suited to trying to be realistic and some just simply aren’t. But what do *you* think. Do you go for the games which attempt to be realistic? Or opt for the more far fetched games?
Cheers,
Quinty
Guys, i'd very much appreciate it if you share your views with me. Cheers.
Realism only makes sense for sports titles, when the more realistic the graphics and gameplay the better.
Aside from that, I strongly prefer unrealism and "far-fetched games" - there's more scope for originality.
Graphical realism is fine and it's always impressive when you see incredibly true-to-life visuals, but what I don't like is when the gameplay is stiffled because the developers are obsessed with making the gameplay realistic as well.
I think gameplay should always to over-the-top - that's where the fun is.
Aside from that, I strongly prefer unrealism and "far-fetched games" - there's more scope for originality.
Graphical realism is fine and it's always impressive when you see incredibly true-to-life visuals, but what I don't like is when the gameplay is stiffled because the developers are obsessed with making the gameplay realistic as well.
I think gameplay should always to over-the-top - that's where the fun is.
I actually understand what you are saying about Shenmue trying o hard to be realistic..... but thankfully Shenmue 2 with the skip time function helped a lot with this.
As you said Crazy Taxi should remain cartoony, its the style of the game, and I hope developers dont get too carried away with realism and how a game SHOULD be!!!!
With car games I think realism is essential really, like in PGR and GT3, because it makes the experience more believable, however a relistic Mario as you said would just not work!
As you said Crazy Taxi should remain cartoony, its the style of the game, and I hope developers dont get too carried away with realism and how a game SHOULD be!!!!
With car games I think realism is essential really, like in PGR and GT3, because it makes the experience more believable, however a relistic Mario as you said would just not work!
Console_kid wrote:
> I actually understand what you are saying about Shenmue trying o hard
> to be realistic..... but thankfully Shenmue 2 with the skip time
> function helped a lot with this.
I agree, much better than the original
>
> As you said Crazy Taxi should remain cartoony, its the style of the
> game, and I hope developers dont get too carried away with realism and
> how a game SHOULD be!!!!
Indeed, hopefully we wont being seeing a "Crazy Taxi 4: Boring cab driver" out soon.
>
> With car games I think realism is essential really, like in PGR and
> GT3, because it makes the experience more believable, however a
> relistic Mario as you said would just not work!
Yep, as Nomad Soul mentioned it's all about the different genre's. Some genre's suit realism and some dont. Simple as that.
Anyway cheers for the replies guys. :-)
> I actually understand what you are saying about Shenmue trying o hard
> to be realistic..... but thankfully Shenmue 2 with the skip time
> function helped a lot with this.
I agree, much better than the original
>
> As you said Crazy Taxi should remain cartoony, its the style of the
> game, and I hope developers dont get too carried away with realism and
> how a game SHOULD be!!!!
Indeed, hopefully we wont being seeing a "Crazy Taxi 4: Boring cab driver" out soon.
>
> With car games I think realism is essential really, like in PGR and
> GT3, because it makes the experience more believable, however a
> relistic Mario as you said would just not work!
Yep, as Nomad Soul mentioned it's all about the different genre's. Some genre's suit realism and some dont. Simple as that.
Anyway cheers for the replies guys. :-)
Nomad Soul wrote:
> Realism only makes sense for sports titles, when the more realistic
> the graphics and gameplay the better.
>
> Aside from that, I strongly prefer unrealism and "far-fetched
> games" - there's more scope for originality.
>
> Graphical realism is fine and it's always impressive when you see
> incredibly true-to-life visuals, but what I don't like is when the
> gameplay is stiffled because the developers are obsessed with making
> the gameplay realistic as well.
>
> I think gameplay should always to over-the-top - that's where the fun
> is.
What about the Sims? it's not a sports game, is based on being realistic yet is one of the most popular titles ever made. even now, add ons are still being produced for this game and you can't get much more realistic than being in control of virtual humans that can do everything that we do.
Don't get me wrong, I like far fetched games where I can do totally wacky things like kill zombies in Resi Evil or smash into cars in Crazy Taxi but Realism offers something else. It gives you the chance to do things that you may never experience and to make it as life like as possible. Gran Turismo, you can have a race in a car that you could only ever dream of having(unless it's the mini cooper or the beetle). Fifa or any other footballing title, Not many people make it as footballers or any other kind of sportsmen but this give you the chance to play as your heroes or master football without ever having kicked a ball.
In conclusion, realism and far fetched games are both needed and would be welcome in my house or in my console's anyday.
Great post by the way Quintmeister, a GAD contender. :)
> Realism only makes sense for sports titles, when the more realistic
> the graphics and gameplay the better.
>
> Aside from that, I strongly prefer unrealism and "far-fetched
> games" - there's more scope for originality.
>
> Graphical realism is fine and it's always impressive when you see
> incredibly true-to-life visuals, but what I don't like is when the
> gameplay is stiffled because the developers are obsessed with making
> the gameplay realistic as well.
>
> I think gameplay should always to over-the-top - that's where the fun
> is.
What about the Sims? it's not a sports game, is based on being realistic yet is one of the most popular titles ever made. even now, add ons are still being produced for this game and you can't get much more realistic than being in control of virtual humans that can do everything that we do.
Don't get me wrong, I like far fetched games where I can do totally wacky things like kill zombies in Resi Evil or smash into cars in Crazy Taxi but Realism offers something else. It gives you the chance to do things that you may never experience and to make it as life like as possible. Gran Turismo, you can have a race in a car that you could only ever dream of having(unless it's the mini cooper or the beetle). Fifa or any other footballing title, Not many people make it as footballers or any other kind of sportsmen but this give you the chance to play as your heroes or master football without ever having kicked a ball.
In conclusion, realism and far fetched games are both needed and would be welcome in my house or in my console's anyday.
Great post by the way Quintmeister, a GAD contender. :)
Good reply Mr.Ritze you raised some good points. Cheers. (Y)
Mr Ritze wrote:
> Gran Turismo, you can have a race in a car that you could
> only ever dream of having(unless it's the mini cooper or the beetle).
*
But just how realistic is Gran Turismo really?
Graphically it's very realistic, but is the gameplay?
If the gameplay was as realistic as the graphics I don't think it would be as enjoyable.
If the gameplay was realistic, hitting a wall at high speed would instantly mean race over. It'd be too frustrating and annoying.
If the gameplay was realistic in most FPS, we'd be killed within seconds and the game would be over.
Graphical realism is good and creates immersion. I'm not sure realistic gameplay is a good thing however - I think it would be too limiting.
> Gran Turismo, you can have a race in a car that you could
> only ever dream of having(unless it's the mini cooper or the beetle).
*
But just how realistic is Gran Turismo really?
Graphically it's very realistic, but is the gameplay?
If the gameplay was as realistic as the graphics I don't think it would be as enjoyable.
If the gameplay was realistic, hitting a wall at high speed would instantly mean race over. It'd be too frustrating and annoying.
If the gameplay was realistic in most FPS, we'd be killed within seconds and the game would be over.
Graphical realism is good and creates immersion. I'm not sure realistic gameplay is a good thing however - I think it would be too limiting.